linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] cpufreq: Return current frequency when frequency table is unavailable

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <711f7b99-e881-4c55-b748-23ac38770ff2@kylinos.cn>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2025 17:57:11 +0800
From: Zihuan Zhang <zhangzihuan@...inos.cn>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: "rafael J . wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
 zhenglifeng <zhenglifeng1@...wei.com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] cpufreq: Return current frequency when frequency table
 is unavailable

在 2025/8/14 17:31, Viresh Kumar 写道:
> On 14-08-25, 17:24, Zihuan Zhang wrote:
>> I just feel that it might not be ideal to set a frequency when the frequency
>> table is unavailable.
>>
>> Perhaps adding a log or warning when the frequency table is missing could be
>> a better approach.
> There are a lot of drivers that don't provide a frequency table, i.e.
> drivers with setpolicy() or target() callbacks. Only the
> target_index() ones provide a freq table.
>
Thank you for the explanation! I now understand that some drivers do not 
require a frequency table to set the frequency.

I will drop it.

Best regards,
Zihuan Zhang